**
Theresa May is the only Tory who can stop Boris becoming PM , poll shows as it emerges 1.1million people regret voting Leave

Theresa May is the only Tory who can stop Boris Johnson following up his stunning Brexit victory over David Cameron by replacing him in Downing Street too – and more than one million people regret voting Leave.

They are among the findings of a post-referendum Survation poll for The Mail on Sunday.

And if the survey is accurate, Mr Cameron may not be the only leader to lose his job as a result of Thursday’s EU vote: a majority of Labour supporters say Jeremy Corbyn should also resign.

I am agnostic as to whether Britain should have Have left the EU or not however I do question poll such as this . It would seem they have to take people’s word that they voted to leave and that those who voted to stay have a great interest in claiming they are disaffected leave voters

I am agnostic as to whether Britain should have Have left the EU or not however I do question poll such as this . It would seem they have to take people’s word that they voted to leave and that those who voted to stay have a great interest in claiming they are disaffected leave voters

This mess kind of reminds me of the 2000 U.S. election where the losers (Democrats) were whining that they couldn’t understand the Florida ballot, that it was not possible for George Bush to have won, that perhaps there should be a re-vote, and even one particular lawyer for the Dems suggested that the votes should be “apportioned” based on voter registration percentages.

Bottom line for that election and now the Brexit election is this: “not voting” is a vote, and you should not be able to change your vote after the election. Much like a sporting event in which you lose, you don’t get a do over because you did something “bone-headed”. Even for the Scot’s who voted to stay, they don’t get to change the rules because they voted overwhelmingly to remain. (If any American Dems want to argue that, then I suppose they would support Texas becoming independent since Texas overwhelmingly votes Republican?)

This mess kind of reminds me of the 2000 U.S. election where the losers (Democrats) were whining that they couldn’t understand the Florida ballot, that it was not possible for George Bush to have won, that perhaps there should be a re-vote, and even one particular lawyer for the Dems suggested that the votes should be “apportioned” based on voter registration percentages.

Bottom line for that election and now the Brexit election is this: “not voting” is a vote, and you should not be able to change your vote after the election. Much like a sporting event in which you lose, you don’t get a do over because you did something “bone-headed”. Even for the Scot’s who voted to stay, they don’t get to change the rules because they voted overwhelmingly to remain. (If any American Dems want to argue that, then I suppose they would support Texas becoming independent since Texas overwhelmingly votes Republican?)

The difference is that Scotland is a nation within a union of nations, not a state within a union of states.

And it was an independent country for some 400 years before the Act of Union in 1707.

The difference is that Scotland is a nation within a union of nations, not a state within a union of states.

And it was an independent country for some 400 years before the Act of Union in 1707.

Texas was an independent nation until 1846. In one sense, it was an independent sovereign nation more recently than Scotland. But to your point, it was independently sovereign for a longer period of time than Texas.

Texas was an independent nation until 1846. In one sense, it was an independent sovereign nation more recently than Scotland. But to your point, it was independently sovereign for a longer period of time than Texas.

Texas was independent but the ruling party were pretty much still US citizens.

Annexation of Texas by the US would have been an act of war which eventually did occur.

Texas was independent but the ruling party were pretty much still US citizens.

Annexation of Texas by the US would have been an act of war which eventually did occur.

The Texas Republic was a transitional phase, the goal having always been US statehood, though this was deferred due to slavery issues. Which is why those who now preach Texan secessionism just don’t get it.

The same occurred in Vermont, which was self-ruling from 1776 to 1791 (longer than TX) although, unlike TX, it had no foreign diplomacy or navy. There was no rubric for the creation of new states before 1791.

Whereas Scotland would be independent today if the laws of biology hadn’t painted their monarchy into a corner (something modern monarchists don’t get).

This mess kind of reminds me of the 2000 U.S. election where the losers (Democrats) were whining that they couldn’t understand the Florida ballot, that it was not possible for George Bush to have won, that perhaps there should be a re-vote, and even one particular lawyer for the Dems suggested that the votes should be “apportioned” based on voter registration percentages.

Bottom line for that election and now the Brexit election is this: “not voting” is a vote, and you should not be able to change your vote after the election. Much like a sporting event in which you lose, you don’t get a do over because you did something “bone-headed”. Even for the Scot’s who voted to stay, they don’t get to change the rules because they voted overwhelmingly to remain. (If any American Dems want to argue that, then I suppose they would support Texas becoming independent since Texas overwhelmingly votes Republican?)

Just what I was thinking. I was saddened by the outcome, but it would not be fair to the people who worked to support their ideas, who did their due diligence, and voted, for someone, to be undermined by people who were sloppy with their vote. This puts the integrity of future elections and referendums in jeopardy. Does an auction house allow anyone to change their mind and say, “Oh I really don’t want that!”

If Parliament overturns the vote legally, due to say a legal block by the Scottish government, that is fine. A “do-over” on the vote, would be a mistake.

I do not like Theresa May. She is liberal like David Cameron. I think a true conservative should become the next Prime Minister. I would like for it to be Nigel Farage. Boris Johnson is good though.

Here we go again with the" Let’s see everything through the US lens." If you think that Theresa May ) is liberal then you obviously don’t know much about UK politics. Even more laughable is your suggestion of Nigel Farage. He lost his seat in the last election, has been sidelined by his own party, and by the leave campaign. Incidentally UKIP has the grand total of 1 MP. Not enough to form a government!

I could see a PM Johnson and a President Trump meeting frequently while looking for a new barber. Who knows what kind of deals could be reached under those circumstances? They might even reach an agreement with North Korea, which appears to need some good barbers also.